Topics: right to be heard
-
Court of Appeal – Right to Be Heard, Manifest Error, and Suspensive Effect in UPC Patent Appeal Proceedings – UPC-CoA-93/2026, 15 July 2026, Siemens Healthineers AG v. Hologic, Inc.
Headnotes: The principle of the right to be heard according to Art. 76(2) UPCA obliges the court to take note of and give due consideration to the submissions of the parties to the proceedings. Among other things, this principle requires the court to deal with the essential substance of a party’s submissions and, insofar as…
7 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, February 24, 2026, decision, UPC_CoA_883/2025; UPC_CoA_892/2025
Rehearing is an exceptional remedy; only fundamental, outcome‑determinative procedural defects justify reopening final appeal decisions (Art. 81(1) UPCA; R. 245, 247 RoP): The court reaffirms the rulings in UPC_CoA_405/2024, decision of 19 June 2025, Alexion vs Amgen, and UPC_CoA_402/2024, decision of 19 June 2025, Alexion vs Samsung. Especially, it is the applicant’s responsibility to demonstrate…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Court of Appeal, July 23, 2024, order on appeal, UPC_CoA_177/2024
Application for preservation of evidence or inspection of premises implies a request to disclose the report on the outcome: The legitimate purpose of the procedure for the preservation of evidence or the inspection of premises (Art. 60 UPCA, R. 192 et seq.) includes the use of the evidence to decide whether to initiate proceedings on…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.